America the Dumping Ground

America is a dumping ground

As we all know, America has become a dumping ground for non-whites from all over the world. Check out this New York Times article about “maternity tourism.” The expectant mothers arrive as pregnant tourists and leave with “American” babies who are fully entitled to all the rights and privileges that come with American citizenship.

SAN GABRIEL, Calif. — The building inspectors and police officers walked into the small row of connected town houses here knowing something was amiss. Neighbors had complained about noise and a lot of pregnant women coming and going. And when they went into a kitchen they saw a row of clear bassinets holding several infants, with a woman acting as a nurse hovering over them.

For months, officials say, the house was home to “maternity tourists,” in this case, women from China who had paid tens of thousands of dollars to deliver their babies in the United States, making the infants automatic American citizens. Officials shut down the home, sending the 10 mothers who had been living there with their babies to nearby motels.


For the last year, the debate over birthright citizenship has raged across the country, with some political leaders calling for an end to the 14th Amendment, which gives automatic citizenship to any baby born in the United States. Much of the debate has focused on immigrants entering illegally from poor countries in Latin America. But in this case the women were not only relatively wealthy, but also here legally on tourist visas. Most of them, officials say, have already returned to China with their American babies.

Immigration experts say it is impossible to know precisely how widespread “maternity tourism” is. Businesses in China, Mexico and South Korea advertise packages that arrange for doctors, insurance and postpartum care. And the Marmara, a Turkish-owned hotel on the Upper East Side in New York City, has advertised monthlong “baby stays” that come with a stroller.


The State Department, which grants tourist visas, is not permitted to deny visa applications simply because a woman is pregnant.

What can I say? Only in America.

The only thing worse than the story itself was the “conservative” response:

“These people aren’t doing anything in violation of our laws,” said Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates tougher immigration controls. “But if anything, it is worse than illegal immigrants delivering a baby here. Those kids are socialized as Americans. This phenomenon of coming to the U.S. and then leaving with people who have unlimited access to come back is just ridiculous.”

This guy is the director of some organization that studies immigration and he believes that illegal aliens from Mexico identify themselves as Americans? He’s joking, right?

Illegal aliens

White driver nearly beaten to death by black mob

A white driver accidentally hit a black man who was involved in a mob fight and ran out in front of his car. The driver was attempting to call for help out of concern for the victim when he was attacked by the black mob, sustaining severe injuries.

Henderson, N.C. — Bystanders severely beat a driver who accidentally hit a man running from a mobile home park near Henderson where large fights broke out Saturday night, state troopers said Sunday.

Troopers said the driver, who didn’t want his name released out of concerns for his safety, was driving down Raleigh Road in Kittrell to get his son a late-night snack from Burger King around 9:15 p.m. Several large fights were taking place in a nearby mobile home park, troopers said.

Reuben Wright, 19, of Henderson, ran out into the road in front of the car, and the driver had no time to see him or stop, troopers said. Wright’s head crashed through the front windshield.

Troopers said bystanders from both sides of the road rushed out into the street, dragged the driver from his car and assaulted him, nearly beating him to death.

He has been released from Maria Parham Medical Center, but his lung is still in danger of collapsing.

“The driver had cuts and bruises all over his head, all over his back,” said Trooper B.E. Pulliam of the North Carolina State Highway Patrol.


Cindy Harris, of Kittrell, watched the attack and stopped to help the victim. She said she flashed her lights and held her horn down for five minutes to get the crowd to scatter.

“I’m very angry,” she said. “It was just a brutal, brutal beating.”

She described how they pulled him from the car, and said four or five people kicked him repeatedly while one man sat on him and pushed his head into the cement.

“(I thought) they’re gonna kill him, they’re gonna kill him,” she said. Though she felt powerless to help, “I couldn’t leave him,” Harris said.

The driver was eventually rescued from the scene in the truck of another bystander until paramedics arrived.

Bruce Coleman, a friend of Wright, said he didn’t know the driver was injured.

“My attention was focused on Reuben,” he said.

Just for the record, the driver was white. The good Samaritan, Cindy Harris, was also white. Everyone involved in the mob beating was black, including the liar who said he didn’t know the driver was injured.

Stories like this are a dime a dozen in contemporary America. They happen everyday just as surely as the sun rises. But, hey, it’s a small price to pay in exchange for integration.

“Experts” can’t figure out why Detroit is dying

A recent article by the New York Times makes mention of the fact that Detroit has lost over 25% of its total population during the course of the past decade. It’s always comical for me to read these so-called “experts” attempting to draw a conclusion for the collapse. They’ll conjure every hypothesis you could think of except for the most obvious one of all.

Detroit is dying because it is a majority black city. Crime, violence, and squalor follow non-whites wherever they go. As this story further proves, black people themselves don’t even want to live around one another. I just can’t put it to you any more plainly (or accurately) than that. Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows this is true but they don’t have the guts to say it. I do. You can’t have a First World nation with a Third World population.

Laying bare the country’s most startling example of modern urban collapse, census data on Tuesday showed that Detroit’s population had plunged by 25 percent over the last decade. It was dramatic testimony to the crumbling industrial base of the Midwest, black flight to the suburbs and the tenuous future of what was once a thriving metropolis.

It was the largest percentage loss for any American city with more than 100,000 residents over the last decade, apart from the unique situation of New Orleans, where the population dropped by 29 percent after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, said Andrew A. Beveridge, a sociologist at Queens College.

The number of people who vanished from Detroit — 237,500 — was bigger than the 140,000 who left New Orleans.


Detroit’s population fell to 713,777 in 2010, the lowest since 1910, when it was 466,000. In a shift that was unthinkable 20 years ago, Detroit is now smaller than Austin, Tex., Charlotte, N.C., and Jacksonville, Fla.

“It’s a major city in free-fall,” said L. Brooks Patterson, the county executive of neighboring Oakland County, which was also hit by the implosion of the automobile industry but whose population rose by almost 1 percent, thanks to an influx of black residents. “Detroit’s tax base is eroding, its citizens are fleeing and its school system is in the hands of a financial manager.”


But a major factor, too, has been the exodus of black residents to the suburbs, which followed the white flight that started in the 1960s. Detroit lost 185,393 black residents in the last decade.

“This is the biggest loss of blacks the city has shown, and that’s tied to the foreclosures in the city’s housing,” Mr. Frey said. Because of the Great Migration — when blacks flowed from the South to the North — and the loss of whites, he said, “Detroit has been the most segregated city in the country and it is still pretty segregated, but not as much.” At one point, the city was 83 percent black.

Take note, Marin County.

Detroit, Michigan

At least citizens of Detroit (pictured above) can enjoy the benefits of diversity.

Pastor Manning again

Pastor Manning again

In this recently posted video Pastor Manning speaks about the nature of the African as no one outside of WN will.  At times his frankness and his frustration are almost unbearable.  One cannot help but feel sympathy for the man.  His solution to the serial destructiveness of his own people, unsurprisingly, is to class it as an Original Sin from which only faith in the Almighty can deliver them.  But sociobiology is not Original Sin.  The conjunction of male assertiveness, impulsivity, poor moral apprehension, and a poor capacity to calculate the consequences of personal choices must have been producers of fitness in the Sub-Saharan evolutionary context.  They were producers of human suffering too, of course.  But Nature contains no aversion to suffering, human or otherwise.  So in diaspore, in the context of other peoples existence, these characteristics remain producers of human suffering, and that suffering is not exclusively African.


One or two of the commenters in the thread to the video have picked up on the fact that:

… the 1% he leaves out is vital. It isn’t the “police” or “military” that keeps the negro from tearing this country apart; it’s White society as a whole.

As Europeans it isn’t our responsibility to exemplify the civilised for Africans to imitate or to suppress African nature in perpetuity and minimise thereby the costs to us in lost lives, lost genetic interests, and in hard cash.  It is our responsibility to protect our own.

Thanks to Hugh for mailing me the link.

A white nationalism for non-whites and liberals, maybe

A white nationalism for non-whites and liberals, maybe

I recall visiting Joe Sobran’s site some years ago and coming across a remark to the effect that the very existence of ethnic Europe is an unbearable reminder to the races flooding our lands of their existential inferiority, and our destruction is the only means by which they can look at their reflection in the mirror.  It’s a sentiment I’ve seen since many times on the nationalist internet.  It certainly explains why, when one finds oneself in conversation with a non-white, the will to racial supremacy is always presumed to hide behind all our words.  It does no good to explain that the racial separation we seek cannot, by definition, afford us opportunities to oppress anybody.  Those nationalists who have concluded that the animus is felt too deeply for the foreign to ever release its grip willingly are doubtless correct.

That leaves us with two options.  Persuasion or more persuasion.  More persuasion would be messy.  We must hope that just persuasion, allied to political power, is enough.

So I wonder whether there isn’t some advantage to be got from a discourse of global freedom to accompany the gesture towards the door.  After all, the fear of European racial supremacism is fifty years out of date and counting.  It is the totality of the Money Power, with its favoured political, business and “ethnic” actuators and clients, which is the coming oppressor.

And if this idea doesn’t chime too much with the Third World colonisers – and it probably won’t – it must offer something to that emotional constituency among our own kind described by Desmond Jones on the Pastor Manning thread thus:

The Anglo-Saxon, being the highest trust society, is able to extend his sympathy not just to his own, but men of foreign nations, men of all races and finally, all sentient beings.

OK, don’t get stuck on the Anglo-Saxon thing.  A beautiful but costly empathy is common to all Europeans, and my interest here lies only in the utility of the notion that ethnic Europe is the last bastion of freedom for the world as well as for ourselves.  After the Olam Ha-ba of a European panmixia there will be nothing.  Liberals who cannot comprehend why our race matters to themselves might perhaps comprehend why it matters to the rest of the world, and thereby find a reason to allow the justice and morality of its survival.

So we would say to them: you must try to understand what is at stake, and what Nationalists are really trying to do. You just can’t get past the racism thing now. But you must. Whether you like it or not, we have to separate from our replacers so that ethnic Europe survives and can take down the interest groups which seek to enslave us all.

Just a thought.

Posted by Guessedworker

Tectonics and the European revolution

Have you had the feeling, as you trawl the big news stories for meanings pertinent to our cause, that we are witnessing right now, in 2011, the unfolding of something extraordinary, something that cannot be mapped in advance, that may change the lives of billions of people, including ours, before its energy is spent?  Adrian Hamilton of The Independent certainly has.  He writes in yesterday’s rag:

Events in the Arab world and in Japan are clearly particular to themselves. But the sense they have given of an old order that has run its course, that no longer responds to the feelings of its people, are not unique.

Consider the list of complaints – corruption that enriches the few and oppresses the many, political systems (democratic as well as autocratic) that have lost the confidence of the population, industrial solutions that cannot cope with catastrophe. They are common cries of much of the world.

If the one dominating factor of events today is their unpredictability, then it would be foolish to predict where they will end up. We don’t even begin to know. But the one thing I am sure of is that history is on the move, and we’re only just at the beginning.

There is something in Hamilton’s idea, I think – at least as regards the Islamic world.  One of the commenters to his article weighs up history’s options thus:

One path leads to tyranny, despotism, corruption and violence. The other to chaos, anarchy, corruption and violence.

… and this also is probably a fair appraisal of the way the two tectonic plates of North African and Middle Eastern politics – modernism and traditionalism – are disposed.  But is there anything in this relevant to our situation, above and beyond the very general assumptions that inform Adrian Hamilton’s thinking?  Marine Le Pen certainly thinks so, judging from the quote I reproduced a couple of days ago:

We’re in a pre-revolutionary situation here. What’s happening today resembles what was happening before the French revolution. I think the desire for a revolution like those on the other side of the Mediterranean exists here. Of course, I’m appealing for a democratic revolution – and that’s also perhaps the role of the Front National – for a peaceful revolution by the ballot box, a patriotic revolution.

Where Hamilton with his unpredicatability thesis and Marine with her pre-revolutionary situation differ is on the question of time.  Nationalists know something about revolution.  We have been thinking on the problem for a long while.  We understand that the opposing tectonic plates on which our lives are lived out – racial community and individualism/economism – move at certain moments, and not necessarily with the peaceful results for which Marine appeals.  The American Civil War was perhaps the classic example.  The rise of Hitler and NSDAP was another.  The Kosovo War was the most recent.

So, following (Adrian) Hamilton’s Rule are there signs in the European world that history is on the move at last?  Or is it just that the drive towards the Globality is pushing on and in turn nationalism, in its struggle to resist, is getting things a little more right with Marine, Wilders and associated civic and anti-Islamist politicos?  In other words, the pressure is continuing to build but there’s no sign of any European earthquake, and no matter what happens in North Africa and the Middle-East our historic moment, if it is going to come at all, will come in its own sweet and, one must hope, demographic rather than geological time.

A few beautiful words

A small disagreement has arisen over the casting for the creakingly long-running ITV crime series, Midsomer Murders.  The essence of it that the series, which is set in a rural idyll of middle-class gentility “somewhere in England”, naturally enough employs an all-white cast.  The lead actor is being changed, and the series sexed up.  But the skin colour of the actors remains all too white.

Well, the executive producer Brian True-May, 65, was interviewed by Radio Times and duly challenged.  “We just don’t have ethnic minorities involved. Because it wouldn’t be the English village with them. It just wouldn’t work … I’m trying to make something that appeals to a certain audience, which seems to succeed. And I don’t want to change it.”

The result has been a minor media frenzy, and the production company, All3Media, has rushed to distance itself from criticism by suspending True-May.  The Daily Mail readership is probably closer to the viewer profile for Midsomer Murders than any other English rag, and its reader-vote on whether True-May should have been suspended records a 91% “No”.  But it was one reader comment posted at 1.00 am tonight on the thread to Cristina Odone’s piece at the Telegraph that really caught my eye.  It is by “Henbane”, and here it is:

I grew up in inner city Manchester (where I was the only white girl in my class), and have lived in West Yorkshire and more recently Leicester. A couple of years ago I moved to a small market town in East Anglia. Before this I had thought myself a multi culturalist, I was so used to being surrounded by people of many ethnicities, and often being the minority myself.

But having moved to an area with practically no ethnic minorities (one Indian family and one Chinese family run restaurants here) I have changed my mind. I feel far more relaxed here. Apart from the low crime rate and well behaved children there is such a feeling of community and belonging here.

Although I am an incomer to the area, I feel I belong here far more than any of the multi ethnic places I have lived in previously. It feels like one integrated community, not a town with many different communities. I have no plans to ever leave, it feels like home.


Nazis and Chinese, Palestinian Jews and Americans

by Alexander Baron

Back in the 1990s I spent a considerable amount of time reading the entire backfile of the Jewish Chronicle for the Nazi era, mostly but not exclusively at Colindale. Although I skimmed over a lot of the advertisements and local news, I read and took in most of the significant stories from 1933-45. Actually, I went back to the 1920s and beyond, and forward into the 1950s and beyond the other way, but the story with which I am concerned here appeared in the issue for October 25, 1935. On page 9, an editorial called Scrap the Transfer Agreement! made one of the most bizarre claims against the Nazis I have ever seen.

No, it had nothing to do with “gas chambers”, not at this early date, nor with pogroms, nor was it the usual whining and wailing about how wonderful are the Jews and how everybody has it in for them.  No, it was something much more profound than that. The wicked Nazis were accused of engaging in a most sinister plot to undermine Palestinian Jews … by subsidising them.

Here is the offending paragraph:

These tainted German goods are often being sold … at … far below cost price, thanks to the German export bonus; and the infant industries of Palestine cannot compete with them. Worse still, the Transfer Agreement, by forcing Jewish merchants and commercial houses to buy or sell German products on pain of financial ruin, and at the same time offering substantial advantages for such practices, is … debasing the life of Palestinian Jewry.

I found the above passage so bizarre that I had to re-read it several times. We all know the Nazis had it in for the Jews; let’s leave World War Two out of this. Jews were progressively excluded from the professions; they were subjected to social ostracism; anti-Semitic propaganda … but the one “crime” of which the Nazis were surely not guilty was subsidising their colony in Palestine.

What is a subsidy? Broadly speaking, a subsidy is a sum of money paid by a government to a body – a company, an institution, etc – in order to reduce the price to the consumer or user. However, the word can be used in a broader sense. For example, some companies subsidise their staff canteens, or offer their employees special terms for certain of their products or services – a staff discount. One of the many complaints levelled against supermarkets today is that in some instances they sell alcohol below cost in order to attract custom, ie they subsidise it.

Subsidies are widely perceived to be unfair, but never – be it noted – by the party who receives the subsidy, unless the subsidy is considered to be too miserly. The one exception appears to be the Jews of then Palestine. Or that was then; the other night when I tuned into a current affairs programme I was greeted with the spectre of an American politician whining in similar vein, this time against the emerging Chinese colossus.

This story has in fact been running for some time; last October, the Washington Post – and doubtless many other American newspapers – ran a story about the Obama Administration launching an investigation “into whether the Chinese government improperly supports its alternative energy companies”.

A subsidy is by definition something that is given free to one party – in this case to American consumers who are buying Chinese goods. The downside is that subsidies do not materialise out of thin air, otherwise every government could subsidise everything, and we would have Paradise on Earth. But who is paying for China’s subsidies? The Chinese taxpayer. Right? So why are American politicians and economists complaining instead of Chinese taxpayers? Every cent of the subsidy to American consumers – whatever Americans are buying from China – comes out of the pocket of China’s citizens. How much is this subsidy? Five percent? Ten percent? If it were a hundred percent, they would be giving away goods for nothing. Would the Obama Administration complain about that? Presumably. In their perverted Alice-in-Wonderland world, totally free Chinese goods would cost American jobs.

They don’t stop to consider the reality that the money American consumers save by buying quality Chinese products can be spent on other goods, or invested. I say “they” don’t stop to consider the reality, but perhaps “they” do, depending on who “they” are. Back in the 19th Century, the French politician Frédéric Bastiat (1801-50) wrote a surreal satire on tariffs and protectionism called The Petition Of The Candlemakers; let’s leave aside the surrealism, and substitute something we call all understand – including our simple-minded politicians.

Back in the 1990s, a certain Bill Gates set up a foundation to promote – among other things – global health. Suppose instead he had decided to concentrate on abolishing urban poverty in America, and to this end he had bought up tens of thousands of acres in and around America’s great cities, and turned them into allotments. Then, instead of building a half billion dollar campus and staffing it with highly paid academics – as he has done – he had staffed these allotments with volunteer gardeners, who would grow and distribute food to the poor people of these areas absolutely free. Would this constitute unfair trade? Who do you think would complain?

Or – approaching the surreal – imagine Bill Gates or some other innovator was to develop a source of free energy, a wonder machine that defied the law of conservation of energy, and churned out enough energy to heat and power the average suburban home. Then he began producing these and distributing them to home-owners and tenants alike for free. Wouldn’t this damage the American economy in exactly the same way as, for example, subsidised, or even free, Chinese coal?  Such a practice would certainly damage someone, but whoever is the bad guy in the looming trade war with China, it is certainly not the Chinese.






Defeat of Arizona Patriotic Immigration Reform Package Calls for Vigilance—Not Pessimism

Death of America is all but certain! Long live Global White Nationalist Movement.

Locust: This is what the enemy believes; Cubias [Email him]says that all the screaming about illegal immigration we are hearing now is just a last gasp of the old America who are coming to grips with the fact that “they might not be the unquestioned masters of America for much longer” because “the younger generation doesn’t share their biases. And that undeniable fact means that the old vision of America will soon be relegated to ignominy.”


Defeat of Arizona Patriotic Immigration Reform Package Calls for Vigilance—Not Pessimism

By Washington Watcher

When Kris Kobach and a group of state legislators held a press conference in January unveiling their model legislation to challenge birthright citizenship, the usual riffraff of self-proclaimed “anti-fa” protesters showed up to try to disrupt the event. In addition to passing out flyers with images of Pilgrims with the caption “Who’s the anchor baby?”, they demanded that Kobach reveal his “corporate backers.”

These wannabe revolutionaries are unwilling to recognize that they are on the same side as the corporate establishment which does not fund any patriotic immigration reform groups, but gives tens of millions of dollars to La Raza.

I noted their disconnect immediately after the press conference. And it became even clearer on March 14, when the CEOs of 60 Arizona businesses sent an open letter to State Senate President and SB 1070 sponsor Russell Pearce stating “we strongly believe it is unwise for the Legislature to pass any additional immigration legislation, including any measures leaving the determination of citizenship to the state.” [CEOs on Immigration Letter, Phoenix Chamber of Commerce (Email the President of the Phoenix Chamber, Todd Sanders)]

By the end of the week, the Republican-controlled State Senate voted down five pieces of immigration control legislation including one that dealt with birthright citizenship, made it a crime for illegal aliens to drive, and required documentation at public schools and hospitals to help set the basis for overturning Plyler vs. Doe and other federal mandates for states to accommodate illegal aliens.

Following this vote, many usual suspects already began proclaiming the death of state-level immigration control. The Huffington Post’s self-described Hispanic Fanatic blogger Daniel Cubias asked “Has Anti-Latino [i.e. anti-illegal immigration] Sentiment Peaked?” His gleeful answer was an astounding Si!

“Even Arizona itself is rethinking its lunatic stance on Latinos. The state’s creators of SB 1070, who for some bizarre reason thought that people were clamoring for a sequel to their divisive legislation, recently introduced several new attacks on Hispanics (and upon the Constitution, while they were at it). But those bills all went down in flames.”

Cubias [Email him]says that all the screaming about illegal immigration we are hearing now is just a last gasp of the old America who are coming to grips with the fact that “they might not be the unquestioned masters of America for much longer” because “the younger generation doesn’t share their biases. And that undeniable fact means that the old vision of America will soon be relegated to ignominy.” [Has Anti-Latino Sentiment Peaked, by Daniel Cubias, Huffington Post, March 18, 2011]

But a New York Times editorial celebrating the defeat was much more cautious in its gloating. While it was happy to see the bills die, it realized “it is not the end of harsh, shortsighted laws.”

Fortunately, even the Times relatively restrained editorial overstates how much of a defeat the vote was for the patriotic immigration reform movement. While it was a disappointment, the momentum is still on the patriots’ side, and they can win again in Arizona and across the nation.

The Times editorial bemoans that the bill was defeated by business interests rather than “strong moral arguments against xenophobic anti-immigration bills.” [Arizona Flinches, April 21, 2011] The reason for this is that the voters of Arizona do are not buying any of the sob stories from the ethnic groups–so the bills were only defeated by the undemocratic influence of corporate power into politics, something the Left claims to oppose

But while the moneyed interests are a formidable adversary, they are vulnerable. Despite their strong grip on the GOP, the Cheap Labor lobby in Arizona was not able to stop Prop 200, the Legal Arizona Workers Act, or SB 1070.

Just because they won this time, in aftershave-filled rooms, does not mean they will be able to stop a future challenge to birthright citizenship.

It is also important to note how much progress patriotic immigration reformers have made on the state level. When the Legal Arizona Worker Act requiring E –Verify for all employers in the state passed in 2007, it was by far the strongest state immigration control law in the country. Just three years ago, I would have said the idea of states challenging birthright citizenship was well-intentioned, but unlikely to go anywhere. However, SB 1070 changed the paradigm so much that it became a realistic option. The fact that it even came up for a vote would have been unthinkable a few years ago.

Within this context, the Republican Party has moved (at least in lip service) much closer to the patriot position. As Russell Pearce notes

“In 2004, Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) was the only member of the Arizona congressional delegation to support Prop 200. The Arizona Republican Party, though not the grass roots, opposed the initiative as well. Seven years later, the state GOP, four of the five Republican congressmen (except Rep. Jeff Flake), and both Republican senators—John McCain and Jon Kyl — support SB 1070.” [Washington Watcher note: Flake flip flopped on amnesty last week—expect him to come out strong for SB 1070 as the Senate Primary race progresses]

But despite the progress immigration patriots made with the GOP, there can be no doubt that the Republican Party Establishment is still an obstacle. Even with men like Pearce in positions of power and the ostensible support of some key Republicans, real patriotic immigration reform still needs to overcome the GOP Establishment and its corporate backers.

But as Pearce has aptly stated: We have fought these battles before and prevailed. We will prevail again.” [1 battle in Arizona immigration war, by Russell Pearce, Politico, March 26, 2011]

“Washington Watcher” [email him] is an anonymous source Inside The Beltway.


Locust: They are so wrong, my generation 25-35 year old white males, are more aware of the anti-white movement then even the older generations. They think that we will just roll over and allow them to take this nation without a fight! I don’t think so, not now, not ever!

911 The Achilles’ Heel of the Two-Party System

911 The Achilles’ Heel of the Two-Party System

by James Buchanan

911 is the Achilles’ heel of the two-party system as long as we have the guts to go after them on this issue. Opinion polls show that a vast majority of Americans aren’t buying the government explanation for 911. One article from 2008 pointed out that a “Scientific Poll (shows that) 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story (and) Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll… A monumental new scientific opinion poll has emerged which declares that only 16% of people in America now believe the official government explanation of the September 11th 2001 terror attacks. According to the new New York Times/CBS News poll, only 16% of Americans think the government is telling the truth about 9/11 and the intelligence prior to the attacks… The 84% figure mirrors other recent polls on the same issue. A Canadian Poll put the figure at 85%. A CNN poll had the figure at 89%. Over 80% supported the stance… (claiming) 9/11 as an inside job…..”

So the people supporting the official government explanation for 911 are not only in the minority; they are a small minority making up only 16 percent of the most gullible portion of the population or people who are paid to say that they believe in the official 911 story like our politicians and government operatives.

Over the years, evidence has steadily built up making the government account less and less believable for anyone willing to keep up on the investigations by Americans with various technical expertise, who have been willing to donate their time to get at the truth. One of the first glaring signs, that something was not right, was the collapse of the 47 story world trade Center Building number 7. This building had not been hit by an airplane, but went down perfectly straight just like a controlled demolition. This is still seen as one of the most glaring inconsistencies and has woken up a great many people.

If Building 7 had been secretly set up with explosive charges to collapse it, then that raises the question whether or not the twin towers were also secretly set up with explosives. Both of the twin towers came down into their own foot prints just like controlled demolitions. Add to that, a great quantity of thermite dust that was found in the debris suggesting that explosives were used to cut through the steel columns. Some columns at ground zero were photographed which had clean 45 degree cuts consistent with a controlled demolition.

Add to all this, an ex-president of Italy, Francesco Cossiga has told the respected Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera that “the disastrous (911) attack was planned and realized by the American CIA and Mossad with the help of the Zionist world to put under accusation the Arabic Countries and to persuade the Western powers to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Another article notes that Dr. Alan Sabrosky, a former director of the Army War College, also stated publicly that 911 was an inside job by traitors within our nation and the Mossad.

Another source notes that Israel was caught trying to set up an al Qaeda cell in Palestine just weeks after 911. Israel has always objected to the US having friendly relations with any Muslim nations. Egypt and Saudia Arabia are two of the friendliest nations with the US. Curiously, almost all the 911 hijackers came from those two nations. The Israeli MOSSAD could have set up additional phony al Qaeda cells to recruit all of the 911 hijackers. Israel, by the way, tried to sour US relations with some false flag bombings in the 1950s in the Lavon Affair. Israel also attempted to sink a US intelligence ship (the USS Liberty) in 1967 without survivors with a probable intention of blaming that attack on Egypt.

One website is made up of over 1,200 engineers and architects who question the official 911 story. One list of points about the twin tower collapse from that website include:

1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-dia. debris field: no “pancaked” floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20 – 40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples….”

The New Colonialism Goes Both Ways

The New Colonialism Goes Both Ways

Who exactly is occupying whom?

By Paul Craig Roberts

What we are observing in Libya is the rebirth of colonialism. Only this time it is not individual European governments competing for empires and resources. The new colonialism operates under the cover of “the world community,” which means NATO and those countries that cooperate with it. NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was once a defense alliance against a possible Soviet invasion of Western Europe. Today NATO provides European troops in behalf of American hegemony.

Washington pursues world hegemony under the guises of selective “humanitarian intervention” and “bringing freedom and democracy to oppressed peoples.” On an opportunistic basis, Washington targets countries for intervention that are not its “international partners.” Caught off guard, perhaps, by popular revolts in Tunisia and Egypt, there are some indications that Washington responded opportunistically and encouraged the uprising in Libya. Khalifa Hifter, a suspected Libyan CIA asset for the last 20 years, has gone back to Libya to head the rebel army.

Gaddafi got himself targeted by standing up to Western imperialism. He refused to be part of the US Africa Command. Gaddafi saw Washington’s scheme for what it is, a colonialist’s plan to divide and conquer.

The US Africa Command (AFRICOM) was created by order of President George W. Bush in 2007. AFRICOM describes its objective:

“Our approach is based upon supporting U.S. national security interests in Africa as articulated by the President and Secretaries of State and Defense in the National Security Strategy and the National Military Strategy. The United States and African nations have strong mutual interests in promoting security and stability on the continent of Africa, its island states, and maritime zones. Advancing these interests requires a unified approach that integrates efforts with those of other U.S. government departments and agencies, as well as our African and other international partners.”[Africom FAQ]

Forty-nine countries participate in the US Africa Command, but not Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, and Ivory Coast. There is Western military intervention in these non-member countries except for Zimbabwe.

One traditional means by which the US influences and controls a country is by training its military and government officers. The program is called International Military and Education Training (IMET). AFRICOM reports that “in 2009 approximately 900 military and civilian students from 44 African countries received education and training in the United States or their own countries. Many officers and enlisted IMET graduates go on to fill key positions in their militaries and governments.”

AFRICOM lists as a key strategic objective the defeat of the “Al-Qaeda network.” The US Trans Sahara Counter Terrorism Partnership (TSCTP) trains and equips “partner nation forces “ to preclude terrorists from establishing sanctuaries and aims to “ultimately defeat violent extremist organizations in the region.”

Apparently, after ten years of “the war on terror” an omnipotent al-Qaeda now ranges across Algeria, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal and Tunisia in Africa, across the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the UK and is such a threat within the United States itself as to require a $56 billion “Homeland Security” annual budget.

The al-Qaeda threat, a hoax as likely as not, has become Washington’s best excuse for intervening in the domestic affairs of other countries and for subverting American civil liberties.

Sixty-six years after the end of World War II and 20 years after the Collapse of the Soviet Union, the US still has an European Command, one of nine military commands and six regional commands.

No other country feels a need for a world military presence. Why does Washington think that it is a good allocation of scarce resources to devote $1.1 trillion annually to military and security “needs”? Is this a sign of Washington’s paranoia? Is it a sign that only Washington has enemies?

Or is it an indication that Washington assigns the highest value to empire and squanders taxpayers’ monies and the country’s credit-worthiness on military footprints, while millions of Americans lose their homes and their jobs?

Washington’s expensive failures in Iraq and Afghanistan have not tempered the empire ambition. Washington can continue to rely on the print and TV media to cover up its failures and to hide its agendas, but expensive failures will remain expensive failures. Sooner or later Washington will have to acknowledge that the pursuit of empire has bankrupted the country.

It is paradoxical that Washington and its European “partners” are seeking to extend control over foreign lands abroad while immigration transforms their cultures and ethnic compositions at home. As Hispanics, Asians, Africans, and Muslims of various ethnicities become a larger and larger percentage of the populations of the “First World,” support for the white man’s empire fades away.


Peoples desiring education and in need of food, shelter, and medical care will be hostile to maintaining military outposts in the countries of their origins.

Who exactly is occupying whom?

Parts of the US are reverting to Mexico. For example, demographer Steve Murdock, a former director of the US Census Bureau, reports that two-thirds of Texas children are Hispanics and concludes: It’s basically over for Anglos.”

Ironic, isn’t it, while Washington and its NATO puppets are busy occupying the world, they are being occupied by the world.

Paul Craig Roberts [email him] was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term.  He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal.  He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University. He was awarded the Legion of Honor by French President Francois Mitterrand. He is the author of Supply-Side Revolution : An Insider’s Account of Policymaking in Washington; Alienation and the Soviet Economy and Meltdown: Inside the Soviet Economy, and is the co-author with Lawrence M. Stratton of The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name of Justice. Click here for Peter Brimelow’s Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.